"An existential position for the modern Republican party"

 

Mike Flynn at Breitbart:

Keeping taxes low is an existential position for the modern Republican Party. It is one of the last issue appeals it has that registers with voters.

And yet, they are allowing the Democrat-Media industrial complex to negotiate themselves into surrendering it. If they do so, why would anyone vote for a Republican ever again?

 

In 2012 exit polls,

63% of voters said taxes "shouldn't be raised to help cut the deficit." Romney won these voters by 24 points, 61-37.

Over a third of voters, 35%, said income tax rates should not be increased for any taxpayers, even the "wealthy." Romney won these voters by 52 points, 75-23.

Taxes were the third "biggest challenge" facing voters. Romney won this group by 34 points, 66-32.

 

And here's the Fiscal Cliff Quote of the Day, from that same link:

"You simply cannot control government spending by giving it more revenue."

Comments

[Elan]

We've gone from (a) starve the beast, to (b) put the beast on a diet, to (c) give the beast more money now and he promises to consider a diet next year, to (d) no more of these annual votes as the beast places its order for a year's worth of food.

[Mannie Sherberg]

If Flynn's use of "existential" means "life or death," then I regretfully agree with him. For many of us Republicans -- who daily scratch our heads and wonder what in the world the party truly stands for these days (forget its 2012 platform statement, which is worthless) -- the party has been skating on thin ice for some time. If the Pubs cave on tax increases, there'll almost certainly be a strenuous call for a third -- and genuinely conservative -- party. There's something deeply saddening about the thought of the party of Lincoln putting itself out of business (we can't blame the Dims for this; it's something we're doing to ourselves) -- but it seems increasingly likely that that is what the party will do. This is what happens when a party forgoes visionary leaders in favor of functionaries, operatives, manipulators, placeholders, and mandarins. Say what we will about Obama, the guy at least has a vision for America: he wants to socialize it. Does any of the current crop of Republican leaders have a vision for America anywhere near as clear?